I am getting so frustrated looking at this new batch because I love them all but don't know what you are actually seeing and capturing with your camera. I know Photoshop exists...and I resized something once...is it playing a big part here in creating the depths and dimensions?
all of my square images are cropped in photoshop and i generally tweek them in one way or another, but they are not altered or manipulated.... it is strange how we feel about these things... maybe it's like showing photos of how we are or of how we used to be... i guess it depends on whether we are looking to create images or capture them... they are very different skills, quite often, if not always, defined by what we hide, or throw away, rather than what we show.... there is nothing to hide, but i believe that the potentials should be explored, nothing ventured, nothing gained... things very quickly cease to be what they used to be, even if the differences are very subtle
... i am not sure what you mean by depths, but sometimes i distort dimensions, either in photoshop or with my camera
I was especially glad to get this reply because I was afraid that I had perhaps alienated you with my questions in the first place. I also want to thank you for the thoughtful response, which really does help me understand the process. And I definitely relate to the image of choosing what to toss and what to show. As for depth, I was using it in a collage sense, referring to the multi-layered effects that often appear in collaged backgrounds. Your work has great depth of color, and it's just hard to picture capturing that in a camera. But then, I use a Kodak point-and-shoot (on automatic), so consider the source! Thanks again.
i am not the best photographer in the world, but i am always learning and have spent a lot of hours going around and finding abstract things to capture... not everything that i try comes out as i wanted it, occasionally it comes out better than i could have imagined, and as i improve my photographic skills there is less rubbish. I think one of my best skills is that of seeing things around me... looking
As for colour depth as you describe it, it is all about the light and using the right setting on the camera best suited for the situation, that can be completely manual on a kodak point and shoot.... sometimes that will capture perfectly... The best time to shoot outside is the last (or first) few hours of daylight, or when there are dark clouds above and bright light coming underneath the clouds.
colour depth is mostly about light conditions.
All that said, there are also ways to bring out the colours and contrast that is in an image with out adding anything using photoshop... and correcting exposures to some extent.... i may do that with my images but when the light conditions are right then there is no need to do so. I am experimenting with various filters to get better results in the less ideal middle of the day, and choosing different subjects which work better in that kind of light.
The looking is key. I am finding that out myself. It leads to seeing, in any field, not just that of cameraology. Sometimes I am tempted to try to take capital P Photographs, but I don't think I am wired that way. And that's okay. I can still enjoy, and be enriched by, excellence such as yours.
Music as opposed to music. Eminem as opposed to vanilla ice. The Beatles as opposed to herman's hermits. The Stones as opposed to the dave clark five (although I did think Mike Smith was pretty darned talented). Photographs as opposed to photographs (snapshots).
interestingly, your explanation has made me look at this in a way that i previously hadn't, which isn't directly the way you intended
i was thinking what kind of difference the rolling stones and THE DAVE CLARK FIVE would make.... this kind of hyped up, text size billing may have some effect on the way that people place reverence on an artist, but it is all entirely relative
it only refers to the status of artists at a particular event or at a particular time... it says nothing about an artists integrity, or their ability to express their ideals or ideas or just their thoughts in a way that people resonate with
i make capitalisation irrelevant, just a hype, a formality and part of an elitist hierarchical structure... i want my name at the top and in bigger print than everyone else's.... it all undermines and overpowers the everyday individual, by relegating them the the irrelevance of less than small print
we should remember that the size of the print is just a hype based illusion and it is integrity in the individual, no matter who they are, which counts.... big type/small mind... or some other association can come to mind...
i respect those who entertain their friends, for nothing, even though their friends think they are small print....
the real point here though, is how you can inspire people in ways in which you had not intended.... which means you can be no judge of your own art... those who think that how talented you are, and how much money you make from your talent are related, are caught up in the global hype which is hierarchical elitism.... it is all delusion, they have mistaken integrity for font size, or traded one for the other.